• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Atheist / Theist Reconciliation Thread

blarg said:
if you get rid of unwanted death and pain and resource scarcity while enforcing protection on people's right to choose things for themselves then it would seem easy


if you don't like other people block them and or get on a private server with only people you do like

why do you need to believe a god who can do anything at all will kill everyone who wont join you in order for you to be happy?
Click to expand...

Good luck with accomplishing true peace on your own...:2razz:
 
blarg said:
why do you need complete harmony to have peace? why do you need a single earth?
Click to expand...

Without it, you get the world we live in...:doh
 
Glitch said:
The high school or college graduate with the best scores and highest grades are typically given a special distinction as a valedictorian and provided an opportunity to address the graduating class. The speech is meant to be inspirational. Often times they will recite what inspired them to achieve, or give up-lifting advice to the graduating class for the future. That sort of thing. Such speeches can also include religious belief as their inspiration. This is typically where the anti-free speech, anti-theists take offense. They want to prevent anyone talking about any subject with which they disagree, like religion. So they make up complete nonsense about how a high school student's speech is somehow establishing a National Religion and become totally unhinged.

Valedictorian speeches are given in the US, Canada, Philippines, and Armenia.
Click to expand...

I see. I agree with you, free speech. If a student wants to bore the pants off an audience by banging on about a god then they should be allowed to do that.
 
btthegreat said:
One of the weird things about this often nasty and depressing debate, is that is starts with competing definitions of the terms like 'atheist' 'agnostic' 'science' and 'faith' with each side digging in for future advantage in the semantics. The last thing I wouldt to do, for peace and harmony here is to start by defining terms because the bomb throwers start there too.

I don't care whether they call me an atheist or agnostic or a humanist or a secularist as long as they don't tell me what I think what I believe or why I think or believe it.
Click to expand...



Hence my answer to the point did not recognize either atheist or theist and was an answer that would have worked if merely the OP was on the question of bridging the gap on the belief in the existence, or not, of a supernatural being (of which there are still different meanings/kinds akin to the various beliefs of deist, theist, pantheist, etc.) or anybody saying you should believe in one thing or another, religious, political or whatever, and follow the rules thereby. But the OP subject was about bridging the gap between atheist and theist, which gives definitional limits by excluding agnostics. More people ID themselves as agnostic than atheist.
 
blarg said:
i believe ther are no gods and that there's no evidence of any gods but i don't know that gods don't exist and one could get me reasonably certain of its divinity with some demonstrations of its power
Click to expand...
So, agnostic. You still allow the possibility.
 
bongsaway said:
As an atheist I must object to your statement that atheist don't believe there can be supernatural. I firmly believe there is more on earth than most of us can pick up on. Like these ghost shows. To me most of them are a load of crap. There used to be a show on about kids with paranormal abilities and most of them were scared of their abilities and didn't like them. I firmly believe these kids could see and hear what they were describing. I just don't believe in a god, a supreme being. I do believe in nature and evolution.
Click to expand...



I did not say atheist do not believe in "the supernatural". I said not in a "supernatural being" as in "the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe". Normally looked upon as anthropomorphic and as intervening in the universe, including in the lives of people.
 
soylentgreen said:
What is objectionable is your dishonesty. Despite being told on numerous occasions that your definition is wrong you still insist on using it. Your insistence that atheism is faith based merely demonstrates how poorly theist will argue their side. The purpose of this thread was to ask if reconciliation was possible but when we must deal with people such as yourself who will be openly dishonest in defining words i fail to see how that is possible.
Click to expand...
What you call dishonesty is candor, since it is a valid distinction and also time honored.

You can have your own opinion, but not your own facts. Until you acknowledge that it is a valid distinction, you will be the dishonest one. You can choose your own phraseology if it makes you feel better.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Both atheism (there is no god) and theism (there is a god) are belief systems (opinions?) based on faith (assumptions which cannot be proven/disproven). For someone having one belief system to accept (assume) the other's belief system is true then they must accept (assume) that their own belief system is false. What difference of opinion could possibly be harder to reconcile?
Click to expand...

Atheism and theism are not belief systems. Theism is a belief in god(s). Atheism is a lack of belief in god(s).

Atheism has no tenets.. Basic theism has no tenets. So theists and atheists have but one bone of contention; belief in something called god. Neither one at its base, is a belief system.

Theism can be a starting point for belief systems revolving around god or gods. There are theistic religions, or belief systems.

Atheism is not a starting point for any belief system. There are no atheistic religions, or belief systems.

It is usually insisted upon by theistic believers that everything is a belief, therefore atheism is a belief. It is the misuse of the word belief that is the problem. Knowing that imaginary things are not real is not a belief in the same sense that believing in a supernatural entity is a belief.
 
devildavid said:
Atheism and theism are not belief systems. Theism is a belief in god(s). Atheism is a lack of belief in god(s).

Atheism has no tenets.. Basic theism has no tenets. So theists and atheists have but one bone of contention; belief in something called god. Neither one at its base, is a belief system.

Theism can be a starting point for belief systems revolving around god or gods. There are theistic religions, or belief systems.

Atheism is not a starting point for any belief system. There are no atheistic religions, or belief systems.

It is usually insisted upon by theistic believers that everything is a belief, therefore atheism is a belief. It is the misuse of the word belief that is the problem. Knowing that imaginary things are not real is not a belief in the same sense that believing in a supernatural entity is a belief.
Click to expand...

That (first bolded above) assertion is contradicted by many dictionary definitions of atheism.

Atheism | Definition of Atheism by Merriam-Webster

That (second bolded above) is simply quibbling over the (slight?) semantic difference between "believing" and "knowing". What you know (believe) is that supernatural forces (beings) do not exist, even if they can be discribed in great detail (defined), because your belief (knowlege base) will not accept them as possibly existing.
 
Jay59 said:
What you call dishonesty is candor, since it is a valid distinction and also time honored.

You can have your own opinion, but not your own facts. Until you acknowledge that it is a valid distinction, you will be the dishonest one. You can choose your own phraseology if it makes you feel better.
Click to expand...

No candor is dealing with a truth where as you are simply demanding that others accept your lie. Thank you for the clear demonstration of why there is such discord between atheists and theists.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (first bolded above) assertion is contradicted by many dictionary definitions of atheism.

Atheism | Definition of Atheism by Merriam-Webster

That (second bolded above) is simply quibbling over the (slight?) semantic difference between "believing" and "knowing". What you know (believe) is that supernatural forces (beings) do not exist, even if they can be discribed in great detail (defined), because your belief (knowlege base) will not accept them as possibly existing.
Click to expand...

Dictionaries only give the most common use of a word where as context gives us meaning of a word. Your dictionary link contradicts you as it speaks only of disbelief and not belief . It even gives an example of how the word is used that shows you are wrong in your belief.
The example; Even as the country has become, overall, more tolerant and more accepting of other faith traditions, atheism has long remained the conspicuous exception.
 
Jay59 said:
What you call dishonesty is candor, since it is a valid distinction and also time honored.

You can have your own opinion, but not your own facts. Until you acknowledge that it is a valid distinction, you will be the dishonest one. You can choose your own phraseology if it makes you feel better.
Click to expand...

Religion is not a fact based prospect. It's make believe bull****. And, no one has to accept the delusions the so-called righteous present as fact. It's just myth and fairy tales, plain and simple.
 
CLAX1911 said:
So an agnostic person has knowledge of God?
Click to expand...

That's not exactly what he said.

soylentgreen said:
Because gnostic means having knowledge of a god, but not necessarily belief in god.

Ignostic is where atheist should start from because we have no idea what sort of god people can believe in.
Click to expand...

:doh
 
CLAX1911 said:
Okay so the argument is whether or not agnostics are atheist.

If he's talking about something else it's not really on topic.
Click to expand...

:roll:

:doh
 
OlNate said:
And, if you're "angry" at theists, what would it take to not be?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that I'm "angry" at theists generally, but any negative feelings I have toward any of them could easily be eliminated if they would just mind their own business and stop trying to shoehorn their beliefs into every crevice of public life, as many of them tend to do.
 
Tlrmln said:
I wouldn't say that I'm "angry" at theists generally, but any negative feelings I have toward any of them could easily be eliminated if they would just mind their own business and stop trying to shoehorn their beliefs into every crevice of public life, as many of them tend to do.
Click to expand...

Isn't that something everybody does?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom